Network

Via Technology Review

-----

If Facebook were a country, a conceit that founder Mark Zuckerberg has entertained in public, its 900 million members would make it the third largest in the world.

It would far outstrip any regime past or present in how intimately it records the lives of its citizens. Private conversations, family photos, and records of road trips, births, marriages, and deaths all stream into the company's servers and lodge there. Facebook has collected the most extensive data set ever assembled on human social behavior. Some of your personal information is probably part of it.

And yet, even as Facebook has embedded itself into modern life, it hasn't actually done that much with what it knows about us. Now that the company has gone public, the pressure to develop new sources of profit (see "The Facebook Fallacy") is likely to force it to do more with its hoard of information. That stash of data looms like an oversize shadow over what today is a modest online advertising business, worrying privacy-conscious Web users (see "Few Privacy Regulations Inhibit Facebook") and rivals such as Google. Everyone has a feeling that this unprecedented resource will yield something big, but nobody knows quite what.

Heading Facebook's effort to figure out what can be learned from all our data is Cameron Marlow, a tall 35-year-old who until recently sat a few feet away from ­Zuckerberg. The group Marlow runs has escaped the public attention that dogs Facebook's founders and the more headline-grabbing features of its business. Known internally as the Data Science Team, it is a kind of Bell Labs for the social-networking age. The group has 12 researchers—but is expected to double in size this year. They apply math, programming skills, and social science to mine our data for insights that they hope will advance Facebook's business and social science at large. Whereas other analysts at the company focus on information related to specific online activities, Marlow's team can swim in practically the entire ocean of personal data that Facebook maintains. Of all the people at Facebook, perhaps even including the company's leaders, these researchers have the best chance of discovering what can really be learned when so much personal information is compiled in one place.

Facebook has all this information because it has found ingenious ways to collect data as people socialize. Users fill out profiles with their age, gender, and e-mail address; some people also give additional details, such as their relationship status and mobile-phone number. A redesign last fall introduced profile pages in the form of time lines that invite people to add historical information such as places they have lived and worked. Messages and photos shared on the site are often tagged with a precise location, and in the last two years Facebook has begun to track activity elsewhere on the Internet, using an addictive invention called the "Like" button. It appears on apps and websites outside Facebook and allows people to indicate with a click that they are interested in a brand, product, or piece of digital content. Since last fall, Facebook has also been able to collect data on users' online lives beyond its borders automatically: in certain apps or websites, when users listen to a song or read a news article, the information is passed along to Facebook, even if no one clicks "Like." Within the feature's first five months, Facebook catalogued more than five billion instances of people listening to songs online. Combine that kind of information with a map of the social connections Facebook's users make on the site, and you have an incredibly rich record of their lives and interactions.

"This is the first time the world has seen this scale and quality of data about human communication," Marlow says with a characteristically serious gaze before breaking into a smile at the thought of what he can do with the data. For one thing, Marlow is confident that exploring this resource will revolutionize the scientific understanding of why people behave as they do. His team can also help Facebook influence our social behavior for its own benefit and that of its advertisers. This work may even help Facebook invent entirely new ways to make money.

Contagious Information

Marlow eschews the collegiate programmer style of Zuckerberg and many others at Facebook, wearing a dress shirt with his jeans rather than a hoodie or T-shirt. Meeting me shortly before the company's initial public offering in May, in a conference room adorned with a six-foot caricature of his boss's dog spray-painted on its glass wall, he comes across more like a young professor than a student. He might have become one had he not realized early in his career that Web companies would yield the juiciest data about human interactions.

In 2001, undertaking a PhD at MIT's Media Lab, Marlow created a site called Blogdex that automatically listed the most "contagious" information spreading on weblogs. Although it was just a research project, it soon became so popular that Marlow's servers crashed. Launched just as blogs were exploding into the popular consciousness and becoming so numerous that Web users felt overwhelmed with information, it prefigured later aggregator sites such as Digg and Reddit. But Marlow didn't build it just to help Web users track what was popular online. Blogdex was intended as a scientific instrument to uncover the social networks forming on the Web and study how they spread ideas. Marlow went on to Yahoo's research labs to study online socializing for two years. In 2007 he joined Facebook, which he considers the world's most powerful instrument for studying human society. "For the first time," Marlow says, "we have a microscope that not only lets us examine social behavior at a very fine level that we've never been able to see before but allows us to run experiments that millions of users are exposed to."

Marlow's team works with managers across Facebook to find patterns that they might make use of. For instance, they study how a new feature spreads among the social network's users. They have helped Facebook identify users you may know but haven't "friended," and recognize those you may want to designate mere "acquaintances" in order to make their updates less prominent. Yet the group is an odd fit inside a company where software engineers are rock stars who live by the mantra "Move fast and break things." Lunch with the data team has the feel of a grad-student gathering at a top school; the typical member of the group joined fresh from a PhD or junior academic position and prefers to talk about advancing social science than about Facebook as a product or company. Several members of the team have training in sociology or social psychology, while others began in computer science and started using it to study human behavior. They are free to use some of their time, and Facebook's data, to probe the basic patterns and motivations of human behavior and to publish the results in academic journals—much as Bell Labs researchers advanced both AT&T's technologies and the study of fundamental physics.

It may seem strange that an eight-year-old company without a proven business model bothers to support a team with such an academic bent, but ­Marlow says it makes sense. "The biggest challenges Facebook has to solve are the same challenges that social science has," he says. Those challenges include understanding why some ideas or fashions spread from a few individuals to become universal and others don't, or to what extent a person's future actions are a product of past communication with friends. Publishing results and collaborating with university researchers will lead to findings that help Facebook improve its products, he adds.

For one example of how Facebook can serve as a proxy for examining society at large, consider a recent study of the notion that any person on the globe is just six degrees of separation from any other. The best-known real-world study, in 1967, involved a few hundred people trying to send postcards to a particular Boston stockholder. Facebook's version, conducted in collaboration with researchers from the University of Milan, involved the entire social network as of May 2011, which amounted to more than 10 percent of the world's population. Analyzing the 69 billion friend connections among those 721 million people showed that the world is smaller than we thought: four intermediary friends are usually enough to introduce anyone to a random stranger. "When considering another person in the world, a friend of your friend knows a friend of their friend, on average," the technical paper pithily concluded. That result may not extend to everyone on the planet, but there's good reason to believe that it and other findings from the Data Science Team are true to life outside Facebook. Last year the Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project found that 93 percent of Facebook friends had met in person. One of Marlow's researchers has developed a way to calculate a country's "gross national happiness" from its Facebook activity by logging the occurrence of words and phrases that signal positive or negative emotion. Gross national happiness fluctuates in a way that suggests the measure is accurate: it jumps during holidays and dips when popular public figures die. After a major earthquake in Chile in February 2010, the country's score plummeted and took many months to return to normal. That event seemed to make the country as a whole more sympathetic when Japan suffered its own big earthquake and subsequent tsunami in March 2011; while Chile's gross national happiness dipped, the figure didn't waver in any other countries tracked (Japan wasn't among them). Adam Kramer, who created the index, says he intended it to show that Facebook's data could provide cheap and accurate ways to track social trends—methods that could be useful to economists and other researchers.

Other work published by the group has more obvious utility for Facebook's basic strategy, which involves encouraging us to make the site central to our lives and then using what it learns to sell ads. An early study looked at what types of updates from friends encourage newcomers to the network to add their own contributions. Right before Valentine's Day this year a blog post from the Data Science Team listed the songs most popular with people who had recently signaled on Facebook that they had entered or left a relationship. It was a hint of the type of correlation that could help Facebook make useful predictions about users' behavior—knowledge that could help it make better guesses about which ads you might be more or less open to at any given time. Perhaps people who have just left a relationship might be interested in an album of ballads, or perhaps no company should associate its brand with the flood of emotion attending the death of a friend. The most valuable online ads today are those displayed alongside certain Web searches, because the searchers are expressing precisely what they want. This is one reason why Google's revenue is 10 times Facebook's. But Facebook might eventually be able to guess what people want or don't want even before they realize it.

Recently the Data Science Team has begun to use its unique position to experiment with the way Facebook works, tweaking the site—the way scientists might prod an ant's nest—to see how users react. Eytan Bakshy, who joined Facebook last year after collaborating with Marlow as a PhD student at the University of Michigan, wanted to learn whether our actions on Facebook are mainly influenced by those of our close friends, who are likely to have similar tastes. That would shed light on the theory that our Facebook friends create an "echo chamber" that amplifies news and opinions we have already heard about. So he messed with how Facebook operated for a quarter of a billion users. Over a seven-week period, the 76 million links that those users shared with each other were logged. Then, on 219 million randomly chosen occasions, Facebook prevented someone from seeing a link shared by a friend. Hiding links this way created a control group so that Bakshy could assess how often people end up promoting the same links because they have similar information sources and interests.

He found that our close friends strongly sway which information we share, but overall their impact is dwarfed by the collective influence of numerous more distant contacts—what sociologists call "weak ties." It is our diverse collection of weak ties that most powerfully determines what information we're exposed to.

That study provides strong evidence against the idea that social networking creates harmful "filter bubbles," to use activist Eli Pariser's term for the effects of tuning the information we receive to match our expectations. But the study also reveals the power Facebook has. "If [Facebook's] News Feed is the thing that everyone sees and it controls how information is disseminated, it's controlling how information is revealed to society, and it's something we need to pay very close attention to," Marlow says. He points out that his team helps Facebook understand what it is doing to society and publishes its findings to fulfill a public duty to transparency. Another recent study, which investigated which types of Facebook activity cause people to feel a greater sense of support from their friends, falls into the same category.

But Marlow speaks as an employee of a company that will prosper largely by catering to advertisers who want to control the flow of information between its users. And indeed, Bakshy is working with managers outside the Data Science Team to extract advertising-related findings from the results of experiments on social influence. "Advertisers and brands are a part of this network as well, so giving them some insight into how people are sharing the content they are producing is a very core part of the business model," says Marlow.

Facebook told prospective investors before its IPO that people are 50 percent more likely to remember ads on the site if they're visibly endorsed by a friend. Figuring out how influence works could make ads even more memorable or help Facebook find ways to induce more people to share or click on its ads.

Social Engineering

Marlow says his team wants to divine the rules of online social life to understand what's going on inside Facebook, not to develop ways to manipulate it. "Our goal is not to change the pattern of communication in society," he says. "Our goal is to understand it so we can adapt our platform to give people the experience that they want." But some of his team's work and the attitudes of Facebook's leaders show that the company is not above using its platform to tweak users' behavior. Unlike academic social scientists, Facebook's employees have a short path from an idea to an experiment on hundreds of millions of people.

In April, influenced in part by conversations over dinner with his med-student girlfriend (now his wife), Zuckerberg decided that he should use social influence within Facebook to increase organ donor registrations. Users were given an opportunity to click a box on their Timeline pages to signal that they were registered donors, which triggered a notification to their friends. The new feature started a cascade of social pressure, and organ donor enrollment increased by a factor of 23 across 44 states.

Marlow's team is in the process of publishing results from the last U.S. midterm election that show another striking example of Facebook's potential to direct its users' influence on one another. Since 2008, the company has offered a way for users to signal that they have voted; Facebook promotes that to their friends with a note to say that they should be sure to vote, too. Marlow says that in the 2010 election his group matched voter registration logs with the data to see which of the Facebook users who got nudges actually went to the polls. (He stresses that the researchers worked with cryptographically "anonymized" data and could not match specific users with their voting records.)

This is just the beginning. By learning more about how small changes on Facebook can alter users' behavior outside the site, the company eventually "could allow others to make use of Facebook in the same way," says Marlow. If the American Heart Association wanted to encourage healthy eating, for example, it might be able to refer to a playbook of Facebook social engineering. "We want to be a platform that others can use to initiate change," he says.

Advertisers, too, would be eager to know in greater detail what could make a campaign on Facebook affect people's actions in the outside world, even though they realize there are limits to how firmly human beings can be steered. "It's not clear to me that social science will ever be an engineering science in a way that building bridges is," says Duncan Watts, who works on computational social science at Microsoft's recently opened New York research lab and previously worked alongside Marlow at Yahoo's labs. "Nevertheless, if you have enough data, you can make predictions that are better than simply random guessing, and that's really lucrative."

Doubling Data

Like other social-Web companies, such as Twitter, Facebook has never attained the reputation for technical innovation enjoyed by such Internet pioneers as Google. If Silicon Valley were a high school, the search company would be the quiet math genius who didn't excel socially but invented something indispensable. Facebook would be the annoying kid who started a club with such social momentum that people had to join whether they wanted to or not. In reality, Facebook employs hordes of talented software engineers (many poached from Google and other math-genius companies) to build and maintain its irresistible club. The technology built to support the Data Science Team's efforts is particularly innovative. The scale at which Facebook operates has led it to invent hardware and software that are the envy of other companies trying to adapt to the world of "big data."

In a kind of passing of the technological baton, Facebook built its data storage system by expanding the power of open-source software called Hadoop, which was inspired by work at Google and built at Yahoo. Hadoop can tame seemingly impossible computational tasks—like working on all the data Facebook's users have entrusted to it—by spreading them across many machines inside a data center. But Hadoop wasn't built with data science in mind, and using it for that purpose requires specialized, unwieldy programming. Facebook's engineers solved that problem with the invention of Hive, open-source software that's now independent of Facebook and used by many other companies. Hive acts as a translation service, making it possible to query vast Hadoop data stores using relatively simple code. To cut down on computational demands, it can request random samples of an entire data set, a feature that's invaluable for companies swamped by data. Much of Facebook's data resides in one Hadoop store more than 100 petabytes (a million gigabytes) in size, says Sameet Agarwal, a director of engineering at Facebook who works on data infrastructure, and the quantity is growing exponentially. "Over the last few years we have more than doubled in size every year," he says. That means his team must constantly build more efficient systems.

All this has given Facebook a unique level of expertise, says Jeff Hammerbacher, Marlow's predecessor at Facebook, who initiated the company's effort to develop its own data storage and analysis technology. (He left Facebook in 2008 to found Cloudera, which develops Hadoop-based systems to manage large collections of data.) Most large businesses have paid established software companies such as Oracle a lot of money for data analysis and storage. But now, big companies are trying to understand how Facebook handles its enormous information trove on open-source systems, says Hammerbacher. "I recently spent the day at Fidelity helping them understand how the 'data scientist' role at Facebook was conceived ... and I've had the same discussion at countless other firms," he says.

As executives in every industry try to exploit the opportunities in "big data," the intense interest in Facebook's data technology suggests that its ad business may be just an offshoot of something much more valuable. The tools and techniques the company has developed to handle large volumes of information could become a product in their own right.

Mining for Gold

Facebook needs new sources of income to meet investors' expectations. Even after its disappointing IPO, it has a staggeringly high price-to-earnings ratio that can't be justified by the barrage of cheap ads the site now displays. Facebook's new campus in Menlo Park, California, previously inhabited by Sun Microsystems, makes that pressure tangible. The company's 3,500 employees rattle around in enough space for 6,600. I walked past expanses of empty desks in one building; another, next door, was completely uninhabited. A vacant lot waited nearby, presumably until someone invents a use of our data that will justify the expense of developing the space.

One potential use would be simply to sell insights mined from the information. DJ Patil, data scientist in residence with the venture capital firm Greylock Partners and previously leader of LinkedIn's data science team, believes Facebook could take inspiration from Gil Elbaz, the inventor of Google's AdSense ad business, which provides over a quarter of Google's revenue. He has moved on from advertising and now runs a fast-growing startup, Factual, that charges businesses to access large, carefully curated collections of data ranging from restaurant locations to celebrity body-mass indexes, which the company collects from free public sources and by buying private data sets. Factual cleans up data and makes the result available over the Internet as an on-demand knowledge store to be tapped by software, not humans. Customers use it to fill in the gaps in their own data and make smarter apps or services; for example, Facebook itself uses Factual for information about business locations. Patil points out that Facebook could become a data source in its own right, selling access to information compiled from the actions of its users. Such information, he says, could be the basis for almost any kind of business, such as online dating or charts of popular music. Assuming Facebook can take this step without upsetting users and regulators, it could be lucrative. An online store wishing to target its promotions, for example, could pay to use Facebook as a source of knowledge about which brands are most popular in which places, or how the popularity of certain products changes through the year.

Hammerbacher agrees that Facebook could sell its data science and points to its currently free Insights service for advertisers and website owners, which shows how their content is being shared on Facebook. That could become much more useful to businesses if Facebook added data obtained when its "Like" button tracks activity all over the Web, or demographic data or information about what people read on the site. There's precedent for offering such analytics for a fee: at the end of 2011 Google started charging $150,000 annually for a premium version of a service that analyzes a business's Web traffic.

Back at Facebook, Marlow isn't the one who makes decisions about what the company charges for, even if his work will shape them. Whatever happens, he says, the primary goal of his team is to support the well-being of the people who provide Facebook with their data, using it to make the service sm

Via The Atlantic

By Alexis Madrigal

-----

Pshhhkkkkkkrrrrkakingkakingkakingtshchchchchchchchcch*ding*ding*ding"

Modem dialup by John Pemberton

Of all the noises that my children will not understand, the one that is nearest to my heart is not from a song or a television show or a jingle. It's the sound of a modem connecting with another modem across the repurposed telephone infrastructure. It was the noise of being part of the beginning of the Internet.

I heard that sound again this week on Brendan Chillcut's simple and wondrous site: The Museum of Endangered Sounds. It takes technological objects and lets you relive the noises they made: Tetris, the Windows 95 startup chime, that Nokia ringtone, television static. The site archives not just the intentional sounds -- ringtones, etc -- but the incidental ones, like the mechanical noise a VHS tape made when it entered the VCR or the way a portable CD player sounded when it skipped. If you grew up at a certain time, these sounds are like technoaural nostalgia whippets. One minute, you're browsing the Internet in 2012, the next you're on a bus headed up I-5 to an 8th grade football game against Castle Rock in 1995.

The noises our technologies make, as much as any music, are the soundtrack to an era. Soundscapes are not static; completely new sets of frequencies arrive, old things go. Locomotives rumbled their way through the landscapes of 19th century New England, interrupting Nathaniel Hawthorne-types' reveries in Sleepy Hollows. A city used to be synonymous with the sound of horse hooves and the clatter of carriages on the stone streets. Imagine the people who first heard the clicks of a bike wheel or the vroom of a car engine. It's no accident that early films featuring industrial work often include shots of steam whistles, even though in many (say, Metropolis) we can't hear that whistle.

When I think of 2012, I will think of the overworked fan of my laptop and the ding of getting a text message on my iPhone. I will think of the beep of the FastTrak in my car as it debits my credit card so I can pass through a toll onto the Golden Gate Bridge. I will think of Siri's uncanny valley voice.

But to me, all of those sounds -- as symbols of the era in which I've come up -- remain secondary to the hissing and crackling of the modem handshake. I first heard that sound as a nine-year-old. To this day, I can't remember how I figured out how to dial the modem of our old Zenith. Even more mysterious is how I found the BBS number to call or even knew what a BBS was. But I did. BBS were dial-in communities, kind of like a local AOL. You could post messages and play games, even chat with people on the bigger BBSs. It was personal: sometimes, you'd be the only person connected to that community. Other times, there'd be one other person, who was almost definitely within your local prefix.

When we moved to Ridgefield, which sits outside Portland, Oregon, I had a summer with no friends and no school: The telephone wire became a lifeline. I discovered Country Computing, a BBS I've eulogized before, located in a town a few miles from mine. The rural Washington BBS world was weird and fun, filled with old ham-radio operators and computer nerds.  After my parents' closed up shop for the work day, their "fax line" became my modem line, and I called across the I-5 to play games and then, slowly, to participate in the nascent community.

In the beginning of those sessions, there was the sound, and the sound was data.

Fascinatingly, there's no good guide to the what the beeps and hisses represent that I could find on the Internet. For one, few people care about the technical details of 1997's hottest 56k modems. And for another, whatever good information exists out there predates the popular explosion of the web and the all-knowing Google.

So, I asked on Twitter and was rewarded with an accessible and elegant explanation from another user whose nom-de-plume is Miso Susanowa. (Susanowa used to run a BBS.) I transformed it into the annotated graphic below, which explains the modem sound part-by-part. (You can click it to make it bigger.)

This is a choreographed sequence that allowed these digital devices to piggyback on an analog telephone network. "A phone line carries only the small range of frequencies in which most human conversation takes place: about 300 to 3,300 hertz," Glenn Fleishman explained in the Times back in 1998. "The modem works within these limits in creating sound waves to carry data across phone lines." What you're hearing is the way 20th century technology tunneled through a 19th century network; what you're hearing is how a network designed to send the noises made by your muscles as they pushed around air came to transmit anything, or the almost-anything that can be coded in 0s and 1s.

The frequencies of the modem's sounds represent parameters for further communication. In the early going, for example, the modem that's been dialed up will play a note that says, "I can go this fast." As a wonderful old 1997 website explained, "Depending on the speed the modem is trying to talk at, this tone will have a different pitch."

That is to say, the sounds weren't a sign that data was being transferred: they were the data being transferred. This noise was the analog world being bridged by the digital. If you are old enough to remember it, you still knew a world that was analog-first.

Long before I actually had this answer in hand, I could sense that the patterns of the beats and noise meant something. The sound would move me, my head nodding to the beeps that followed the initial connection. You could feel two things trying to come into sync: Were they computers or me and my version of the world?

As I learned again today, as I learn every day, the answer is both.

Via Slash Gear

-----

Microsoft has let it be known that their final release of the Internet Explorer 10 web browser software will have “Do Not Track” activated right out of the box. This information has upset advertisers across the board as web ad targeting – based on your online activities – is one of the current mainstays of big-time advertiser profits. What Do Not Track, or DNT does is to send out signal from your web browser, Internet Explorer 10 in this case, to websites letting them know that the user refuses to be seen in such a way.

A very similar Do Not Track feature currently exists on Mozilla’s Firefox browser and is swiftly becoming ubiquitous around the web as a must-have feature for web privacy. This will very likely bring about a large change in the world of online advertising specifically as, again, advertisers rely on invisible tracking methods so heavily. Tracking in place today also exists on sites such as Google where your search history will inform Google on what you’d like to see for search results, News posts, and advertisement content.

The Digital Advertising Aliance, or DAA, has countered Microsoft’s announcement saying that the IE10 browser release would oppose Microsoft’s agreement with the White House earlier this year. This agreement had the DAA agreeing to recognize and obey the Do Not Track signals from IE10 just so long as the option to have DNT activated was not turned on by default. Microsoft Chief Privacy Officer Brendan Lynch spoke up this week on the situation this week as well.

“In a world where consumers live a large part of their lives online, it is critical that we build trust that their personal information will be treated with respect, and that they will be given a choice to have their information used for unexpected purposes.

While there is still work to do in agreeing on an industry-wide definition of DNT, we believe turning on Do Not Track by default in IE10 on Windows 8 is an important step in this process of establishing privacy by default, putting consumers in control and building trust online.” – Lynch

Personal Comment:

Do Not Track

Via ReadWrite

-----

Last September, during the f8 Developers’ Conference, Facebook CTO Bret Taylor said that the company had no plans for a “central app repository” – an app store. Today, Facebook is changing its tune. The social giant has announced App Center, a section of Facebook dedicated to discovering and deploying high-quality apps on the company’s platform. The App Center will push apps to iPhone, Android and the mobile Web, giving Facebook its first true store for mobile app discovery. 

The departure from Facebook’s previous company line comes as the social platform ramps up its mobile offerings to make money from its hundreds of millions of mobile users. This is not your father's app store, though.

Let's start with the requirements. Facebook has announced a strict set of style and quality guidelines to get apps placed in App Center. Apps that are considered high-quality, as decided by Facebook’s Insights analytics platform, will get prominent placement. Quality is determined by user ratings and app engagement. Apps that receive poor ratings or do not meet Facebook’s quality guidelines won't be listed. 

Whether or not an app is a potential Facebook App Center candidate hinges on several factors. It must

• have a canvas page (a page that sets the app's permissions on Facebook’s platform)

• be built for iOS, Android or the mobile Web

• use a Facebook Login or be a website that uses a Facebook Login. 

Facebook is in a tricky spot with App Center. It will house not only apps that are specifically run through its platform but also iOS and Android apps. Thus it needs to achieve a balance between competition and cooperation with some of the most powerful forces in the tech universe. If an app in App Center requires a download, the download link on the app’s detail page will bring the user to the appropriate app repository, either Apple's App Store or Android’s Google Play. 

One of the more interesting parts of App Center is that Facebook will allow paid apps. This is a huge move for Facebook as it provides a boost to its Credits payment service. One of the benefits of having a store is that whoever controls the store also controls transactions arising from the items in it, whether payments per download or in-app purchases. This will go a long way towards Facebook’s goal of monetizing its mobile presence without relying on advertising. 

Facebook App Center Icon Guidelines

Developers interested in publishing apps to Facebook’s App Center should take a look at both the guidelines and the tutorial that outlines how to upload the appropriate icons, how to request permissions, how to use Single Sign On (SSO, a requirement for App Center) and the app detail page. 

This is a good move for Facebook. It will give the company several avenues to start making money off of mobile but also strengthen its position as one of the backbones of the Web. For instance, App Center is both separate from iOS and Android but also a part of it. Through App Center, Facebook can direct traffic to its apps, monitor who and how users are downloading applications and keep itself at the center of the user experience.

Via makeuseof

-----

The cloud storage scene has heated up recently, with a long-awaited entry by Google and a revamped SkyDrive from Microsoft. Dropbox has gone unchallenged by the major players for a long time, but that’s changed – both Google and Microsoft are now challenging Dropbox on its own turf, and all three services have their own compelling features. One thing’s for sure – Dropbox is no longer the one-size-fits-all solution.

These three aren’t the only cloud storage services – the cloud storage arena is full of services with different features and priorities, including privacy-protecting encryption and the ability to synchronize any folder on your system.

Dropbox

Dropbox introduced cloud storage to the masses, with its simple approach to cloud storage and synchronization – a single magic folder that follows you everywhere. Dropbox deserves credit for being a pioneer in this space and the new Google Drive and SkyDrive both build on the foundation that Dropbox laid.

Dropbox doesn’t have strong integration with any ecosystems – which can be a good thing, as it is an ecosystem-agnostic approach that isn’t tied to Google, Microsoft, Apple, or any other company’s platform.

Dropbox today is a compelling and mature offering supporting a wide variety of platforms. Dropbox offers less free storage than the other services (unless you get involved in their referral scheme) and its prices are significantly higher than those of competing services – for example, an extra 100GB is four times more expensive with Dropbox compared to Google Drive.

• Supported Platforms: Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS, Blackberry, Web.
• Free Storage: 2 GB (up to 16 GB with referrals).
• Price for Additional Storage: 50 GB for $10/month, 100 GB for $20/month.
• File Size Limit: Unlimited.
• Standout Features: the Public folder is an easy way to share files. Other services allow you to share files, but it isn’t quite as easy. You can sync files from other computers running Dropbox over the local network, speeding up transfers and taking a load off your Internet connection.

Google Drive

Google Drive is the evolution of Google Docs, which already allowed you to upload any file – Google Drive bumps the storage space up from 1 GB to 5 GB, offers desktop sync clients, and provides a new web interface and APIs for web app developers.

Google Drive is a serious entry from Google, not just an afterthought like the upload-any-file option was in Google Docs.

Its integration with third-party web apps – you can install apps and associate them with file types in Google Drive – shows Google’s vision of Google Drive being a web-based hard drive that eventually replaces the need for desktop sync clients entirely.

• Supported Platforms: Windows, Mac, Android, Web, iOS (coming soon), Linux (coming soon).
• Free Storage: 5 GB.
• Price for Additional Storage: 25 GB for $2.49/month, 100 GB for $4.99/month.
• File Size Limit: 10 GB.
• Standout Features: Deep search with automatic OCR and image recognition, web interface that can launch files directly in third-party web apps.

You can actually purchase up to 16 TB of storage space with Google Drive – for $800/month!

SkyDrive

Microsoft released a revamped SkyDrive the day before Google Drive launched, but Google Drive stole its thunder. Nevertheless, SkyDrive is now a compelling product, particularly for people into Microsoft’s ecosystem of Office web apps, Windows Phone, and Windows 8, where it’s built into Metro by default.

Like Google with Google Drive, Microsoft’s new SkyDrive product imitates the magic folder pioneered by Dropbox.

Microsoft offers the most free storage space at 7 GB – although this is down from the original 25 GB. Microsoft also offers good prices for additional storage.

• Supported Platforms: Windows, Mac, Windows Phone, iOS, Web.
• Free Storage: 7 GB.
• Price for Additional Storage: 20 GB for $10/year, 50 GB for $25/year, 100 GB for $50/year
• File Size Limit: 2 GB
• Standout Features: Ability to fetch unsynced files from outside the synced folders on connected PCs, if they’ve been left on.

Other Services

SugarSync is a popular alternative to Dropbox. It offers a free 5 GB of storage and it lets you choose the folders you want to synchronize – a feature missing in the above services, although you can use some tricks to synchronize other folders. SugarSync also has clients for mobile platforms that don’t get a lot of love, including Symbian, Windows Mobile, and Blackberry (Dropbox also has a Blackberry client).

Amazon also offers their own cloud storage service, known as Amazon Cloud Drive. There’s one big problem, though – there’s no official desktop sync client. Expect Amazon to launch their own desktop sync program if they’re serious about competing in this space. If you really want to use Amazon Cloud Drive, you can use a third-party application to access it from your desktop.

Box is popular, but its 25 MB file size limit is extremely low. It also offers no desktop sync client (except for businesses). While Box may be a good fit for the enterprise, it can’t stand toe-to-toe with the other services here for consumer cloud storage and syncing.

If you’re worried about the privacy of your data, you can use an encrypted service, such as SpiderOak or Wuala, instead. Or, if you prefer one of these services, use an app like BoxCryptor to encrypt files and store them on any cloud storage service.

Via DVICE

-----

Via Vanity Fair

---

When the Internet was created, decades ago, one thing was inevitable: the war today over how (or whether) to control it, and who should have that power. Battle lines have been drawn between repressive regimes and Western democracies, corporations and customers, hackers and law enforcement. Looking toward a year-end negotiation in Dubai, where 193 nations will gather to revise a U.N. treaty concerning the Internet, Michael Joseph Gross lays out the stakes in a conflict that could split the virtual world as we know it.

Access to the full article @Vanity Fair

Via ars technica

-----

It's nice to imagine the cloud as an idyllic server room—with faux grass, no less!—but there's actually far more going on than you'd think.

Maybe you're a Dropbox devotee. Or perhaps you really like streaming Sherlock on Netflix. For that, you can thank the cloud.

In fact, it's safe to say that Amazon Web Services (AWS) has become synonymous with cloud computing; it's the platform on which some of the Internet's most popular sites and services are built. But just as cloud computing is used as a simplistic catchall term for a variety of online services, the same can be said for AWS—there's a lot more going on behind the scenes than you might think.

If you've ever wanted to drop terms like EC2 and S3 into casual conversation (and really, who doesn't?) we're going to demystify the most important parts of AWS and show you how Amazon's cloud really works.

Elastic Cloud Compute (EC2)

Think of EC2 as the computational brain behind an online application or service. EC2 is made up of myriad instances, which is really just Amazon's way of saying virtual machines. Each server can run multiple instances at a time, in either Linux or Windows configurations, and developers can harness multiple instances—hundreds, even thousands—to handle computational tasks of varying degrees. This is what the elastic in Elastic Cloud Compute refers to; EC2 will scale based on a user's unique needs.

Instances can be configured as either Windows machines, or with various flavors of Linux. Again, each instance comes in different sizes, depending on a developer's needs. Micro instances, for example, only come with 613 MB of RAM, while Extra Large instances can go up to 15GB. There are also other configurations for various CPU or GPU processing needs.

Finally, EC2 instances can be deployed across multiple regions—which is really just a fancy way of referring to the geographic location of Amazon's data centers. Multiple instances can be deployed within the same region (on separate blocks of infrastructure called availability zones, such as US East-1, US East-2, etc.), or across more than one region if increased redundancy and reduced latency is desired

Elastic Load Balance (ELB)

Another reason why a developer might deploy EC2 instances across multiple availability zones and regions is for the purpose of load balancing. Netflix, for example, uses a number of EC2 instances across multiple geographic location. If there was a problem with Amazon's US East center, for example, users would hopefully be able to connect to Netflix via the service's US West instances instead.

But what if there is no problem, and a higher number of users are connecting via instances on the East Coast than on the West? Or what if something goes wrong with a particular instance in a given availability zone? Amazon's Elastic Load Balance allows developers to create multiple EC2 instances and set rules that allow traffic to be distributed between them. That way, no one instance is needlessly burdened while others idle—and when combined with the ability for EC2 to scale, more instances can also be added for balance where required.

Elastic Block Storage (EBS)

Think of EBS as a hard drive in your computer—it's where an EC2 instance stores persistent files and applications that can be accessed again over time. An EBS volume can only be attached to one EC2 instance at a time, but multiple volumes can be attached to the same instance. An EBS volume can range from 1GB to 1TB in size, but must be located in the same availability zone as the instance you'd like to attach to.

Because EC2 instances by default don't include a great deal of local storage, it's possible to boot from an EBS volume instead. That way, when you shut down an EC2 instance and want to re-launch it at a later date, it's not just files and application data that persist, but the operating system itself.

Simple Storage Service (S3)

Unlike EBS volumes, which are used to store operating system and application data for use with an EC2 instance, Amazon's Simple Storage Service is where publicly facing data is usually stored instead. In other words, when you upload a new profile picture to Twitter, it's not being stored on an EBS volume, but with S3.

S3 is often used for static content, such as videos, images or music, though virtually anything can be uploaded and stored. Files uploaded to S3 are referred to as objects, which are then stored in buckets. As with EC2, S3 storage is scalable, which means that the only limit on storage is the amount of money you have to pay for it.

Buckets are also stored in regions, and within that region “are redundantly stored on multiple devices across multiple facilities.” However, this can cause latency issues if a user in Europe is trying to access files stored in a bucket within the US West region, for example. As a result, Amazon also offers a service called CloudFront, which allows objects to be mirrored across other regions.

While these are the core features that make up Amazon Web Services, this is far from a comprehensive list. For example, on the AWS landing page alone, you'll find things such as DynamoDB, Route53, Elastic Beanstalk, and other features that would take much longer to detail here.

However, if you've ever been confused about how the basics of AWS work—specifically, how computational data and storage is provisioned and scaled—we hope this gives you a better sense of how Amazon's brand of cloud works.

Correction: Initially, we confused regions in AWS with availability zones. As Mhj.work explains in the comments of this article, "availability Zones are actually "discrete" blocks of infrastructure ... at a single geographical location, whereas the geographical units are called Regions. So for example, EU-West is the Region, whilst EU-West-1, EU-West-2, and EU-West-3 are Availability Zones in that Region." We have updated the text to make this point clearer.

Via CIO TODAY

-----

Business travelers -- and the enterprises that foot their phone bills -- have been complaining about high roaming fees in Europe for years. Now, some relief is finally in sight.

Indeed, both data roaming and phone calls travelers make while doing business (or taking a vacation) in Europe should be much cheaper this summer thanks to a deal done in the European Parliament this week.

Members of the European Parliament and the Danish Presidency of the Council of Ministers agreed to lower price caps on roaming. Parliament as a whole still needs to approve the deal. But if all runs smoothly the new rules will take effect July 1.

"I am satisfied that the Council approved Parliament's approach to tackle very high prices of phone calls, SMS and in particular of data roaming," said Angelika Niebler of Germany, Parliament's reporter for the draft legislation. "The proposed price caps ensure a sufficient margin between wholesale and retail prices to assure a level of competition that will enable new players to enter the market."

How Low Do They Go?

The agreement increases transparency and consumer protection to prevent bill shocks, Niebler said. That means European Union consumers no longer need to worry about accidentally running up huge bills when using their mobile devices both within and outside the EU. Of course, it's also a boon for consumers from other nations traveling to Europe.

How much savings are we talking about? According to the new rules, a downloaded megabyte would cost no more than 70 cents. That cost drops down to 45 cents in 2013 and 20 cents by July 2014. This is a big improvement, seeing as there is currently no price ceiling for mobile data services charged to consumers.

On the phone call front, the cost of a one-minute call would not exceed 29 cents under the new rules. That declines to 19 cents as of July 2014. That's down from 35 cents under the current legislation. Finally, an SMS would cost no more than 9 cents. That drops to 6 cents as by July 2014 and marks an 11 percent cut from current costs.

Nixing Roaming Altogether

"Mobile roaming charges in the EU are artificially high. Given the fact that they are trying to treat the entire continent like a single country, I don't understand why mobile roaming charges are so high between countries," said Mike Disabato, managing vice president of network and telecom at Gartner.

Practically speaking, the new rules mean that you only need one SIM card while traveling in Europe. Of course, you can't get a SIM card on an iPhone unless you buy an unlocked phone for $800. But if you do use a SIM card you will not have to change phone numbers every time you go to a different country.

"The new rules will make it a lot cheaper for people who actually have to do business in Europe. Any time you start reducing these types of rates it's a good thing," Disabato said. "We got rid of roaming charges a long time ago. It's about time they go in Europe. It will take until the EU decides they are going to make it happen."

Via ars technica

-----